Transit workers suit may get out of neutral

Monday

Apr 25, 2011 at 12:01 AM

STOCKTON - The legal case of three San Joaquin Regional Transit District employees claiming they were fired in retaliation for assisting in a civil grand jury investigation of the transit district has been lingering for the better part of three years.

Zachary K. Johnson

STOCKTON - The legal case of three San Joaquin Regional Transit District employees claiming they were fired in retaliation for assisting in a civil grand jury investigation of the transit district has been lingering for the better part of three years.

The transit district argues the three employees were laid off as the agency faced a budget crunch created by dwindling revenue and rising gas prices, not retribution.

The two sides appear far from reaching a settlement, and the course was set toward a jury trial, which was scheduled to begin today. But attorneys representing both parties said today's appearance will likely be short, because scheduling difficulties could push the trial date further into the future.

The case has its origins in late 2007, when the 2007-08 San Joaquin County grand jury began investigating a complaint against the transit district.

The stinging report ultimately issued by the grand jury in June 2008 criticized the transit district, finding it wasted money on consultants, misused credit cards and followed improper procurement procedures. The report was published days after the three employees lost their jobs.

Former Director of Maintenance Bobby Kuhn testified before the grand jury, and officials at the agency knew it because he told them, according to court documents. Former Director of Business Analysis Kari Wilson and former maintenance analyst Stacy Douglas claim they were fired for providing information and documents to Kuhn.

"It's been three years," Kuhn said. "We're ready to have our day in court."

It's illegal to retaliate against employees providing information about perceived illegal activity to a government agency, Robert Carichoff, the attorney representing the three former employees, wrote in court documents. Kuhn's testimony was protected activity, he wrote. And when Wilson provided documents about consultant contracts and Douglas provided documents related to the district purchase of a police car - these, too, were protected activities, Carichoff wrote.

The grand jury called the 2006 purchase of the police car a misuse of public funds, because it wasn't owned by the police and therefore couldn't be outfitted with necessary police equipment; as a result, it was not put into service. In its response, the transit district agreed the purchase had not been "sufficiently explored," but that it was not a misuse of funds, because the district could sell the car and recoup the cost.

In a written statement in court documents, Donna DeMartino, the transit district's general manager, maintains no district officials knew the content of Kuhn's testimony before the release of the grand jury report.

Looming deficits in 2008 prompted the creation of a budget committee, which found both Wilson's and Kuhn's positions were "unessential," according to DeMartino's statement. She added Douglas' position was eliminated because of "budgetary considerations."

"The decision to eliminate the positions of the three plaintiffs was based solely on difficult financial decisions that were necessitated by a large budget shortfall," according to DeMartino. "The budgetary problems were a result of rising fuel costs and of the recession, which sharply reduced state funding available to subsidize public transportation."

Between the time of Kuhn's testimony and the termination of his job, Kuhn also maintains he was harassed.

"I have been removed from every project at this agency as project manager. My roles (have) changed drastically within the agency since I have been asked to speak before the Grand Jury," Kuhn wrote in a February 2008 letter to the RTD Board of Directors. He also noted he was still a dedicated employee.

Also in court documents is a written warning to Kuhn from DeMartino. In it, she accuses him of repeatedly disparaging her decisions in a "demeaning manner" and making false statements to employees.

The board commissioned an independent investigation of Kuhn's claims of harassment, deciding they were not based in fact, according to court documents submitted by Albert Ellis, the lawyer representing the transit district.

The former employees asked for damages, back pay and other recompense. In December, they offered to settle for about $7.7 million.